1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant operated a cosmetic, “D”, “(i.e., from around 2014 to June 2015) and operated a cosmetic, “E red store” after June 2015.

(hereinafter referred to as “the beauty room of this case”). (b)

Plaintiff

A From June 6, 2012 to March 31, 2015, and Plaintiff B, from July 29, 2011 to October 11, 2015, performed Hodier’s duties in the beauty art room of this case.

The Plaintiffs were paid a fixed amount each month from 11:00 to 21:00 a.m. from 10:00 a.m. to 20:0 a.m., at the Defendant’s request, the amount calculated according to the rate of income distribution as pre-determined in the total amount of cosmetic treatment every month after concluding a contract under the name of “free income and occupation contract” and “commission contract”.

C. The Defendant was indicted on the charge of violating the Labor Standards Act and the Act on the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits on the ground that the Plaintiffs did not pay retirement allowances and overtime work allowances to the Plaintiffs without agreement on the extension of payment due date after retirement from the beauty art room of this case.

(Seoul Western District Court Decision 2016Da1602). In the above case, the Defendant was convicted of violating the Act on Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits due to the delayed payment of retirement allowances to the Plaintiffs, who are workers, but the violation of the Labor Standards Act due to the delayed payment of allowances was pronounced not guilty on the ground that it is difficult to prove that the Plaintiffs worked 60 hours each month, without any reasonable doubt.

Therefore, both parties appealed as Seoul Western District Court 2018No211, and the above court rendered a judgment of conviction on July 4, 2019 on the violation of the Act on the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits. However, regarding the violation of the Labor Standards Act due to the delayed payment of allowances, considering the method of payment of wages and the nature of the work, it is deemed that the wage paid to the Plaintiffs includes overtime allowances.